Welcome to the Orioles Nation Forums! Like most online communities, you must register to post on our message board. However, posting is free--it always will be--and registration is a simple process. Become part of the growing Orioles Nation community and register now!

Steroid use, whether proven or just suspected, has become a factor in voting for the Hall of Fame. Do you think that players should be evaluated differently for proven or suspected performance enhancing drug (PEDs) use during the “Steroid Era”, or do you think their performance should be judged against their peers?

Do you believe there are any players that have been unfairly evaluated for Hall of Fame admission by proven or suspected PED use? If so, which ones and why.

Do you believe there are any players from the “Steroid Era” that should never be voted into the Hall of Fame because of (PEDs)? If so, which ones and why.

Put them in; you still have to hit the baseball. And while you are at it, put Rose in as well. We've already beaten that horse to death. The guy belongs in Cooperstown. Just don't ask him to handicap games for you

osforlife wrote:Yes. Although we don't know how much it effected their play, it's cheating and thats the bottom line. Not only disqualified from the Hall of Fame, but record books too.

So, you're saying that EVERYONE that has admitted to using Greenies should be eliminated from the Hall of Fame? Do you have an idea of how many players that would be and the NAMES on that list. You're talking about gutting the HOF.

If you use the same standard that most sportswriters are using that would mean that NO player from the early 50s until the late 80s would eligible for the HOF, and if they have already been admitted they should be expelled. Is that really what you're saying?

It's at the point where we just have to accept that an entire generation was built around this. You just have to accept that it had become almost a "standard". All the players that deserve to make the HOF that did them, most likely made it anyways. And even if you argued they didn't, they were still at the top of the game for many years to come.

It's at the point where we just have to accept that an entire generation was built around this. You just have to accept that it had become almost a "standard". All the players that deserve to make the HOF that did them, most likely made it anyways. And even if you argued they didn't, they were still at the top of the game for many years to come.

It's always going to be a touchy subject though.

I had a conversation with my son today in which he argued that we should try to identify which players may have been squeaky clean and only consider them for Hall admission. I raised this scenario:

Suppose you have a pitcher named Johnny Clean. He has NEVER used any form of PED. But he plays on a team that during his career always had at least five regular fielders or hitters that did. All of THEIR performances would have been enhanced. PEDs would have made their bodies stronger and given them more endurance. A 3B would have had a faster reaction time, an extra step, and a stronger throw to 1B. An OF would have the extra step in chasing down a ball and a stronger throw to a base. The C would have had a faster reaction time against a base stealer and a stronger throw to 2B. Once the ball left Johnny Clean's hand many beneficial things would have happened because of OTHER players using PEDs that would have benefited Johnny Clean and improved his stats and success. That's before you consider that his teammates would have been better producers at the plate, which would have given him more runs. That could have resulted in him winning more games.

Johnny Clean hasn't touched an aspirin and he has benefited from PEDs. THAT'S what makes it impossible to pick and choose which players were "clean" and which ones weren't, and why it necessary to simply evaluated ALL players from the "Steroids Era" against their competition. EVERY PLAYER WAS AFFECTED.

osforlife wrote:Yes. Although we don't know how much it effected their play, it's cheating and thats the bottom line. Not only disqualified from the Hall of Fame, but record books too.

So, you're saying that EVERYONE that has admitted to using Greenies should be eliminated from the Hall of Fame? Do you have an idea of how many players that would be and the NAMES on that list. You're talking about gutting the HOF.

If you use the same standard that most sportswriters are using that would mean that NO player from the early 50s until the late 80s would eligible for the HOF, and if they have already been admitted they should be expelled. Is that really what you're saying?

I'm not sure when the HGH rule came into use, but whoever illegally took steriods should be disqualified from the Hall of Fame. Yes, that's what I'm saying. Or you could just put an asterisk by all the players who cheated their way in.

osforlife wrote:Yes. Although we don't know how much it effected their play, it's cheating and thats the bottom line. Not only disqualified from the Hall of Fame, but record books too.

So, you're saying that EVERYONE that has admitted to using Greenies should be eliminated from the Hall of Fame? Do you have an idea of how many players that would be and the NAMES on that list. You're talking about gutting the HOF.

If you use the same standard that most sportswriters are using that would mean that NO player from the early 50s until the late 80s would eligible for the HOF, and if they have already been admitted they should be expelled. Is that really what you're saying?

I'm not sure when the HGH rule came into use, but whoever illegally took steriods should be disqualified from the Hall of Fame. Yes, that's what I'm saying. Or you could just put an asterisk by all the players who cheated their way in.

But the question I raised was GREENIES (amphetamines) use. The impression you gave me was that ALL of the Greenies user should be kicked out of the Hall. That would include Brooks and Frank Robinson, Jim Palmer, Eddie Murray, Hank Aaron, Bob Gibson, Mickey Mantle, and a large group of other players.

it's cheating and thats the bottom line. Not only disqualified from the Hall of Fame, but record books too.

osforlife wrote:Yes. Although we don't know how much it effected their play, it's cheating and thats the bottom line. Not only disqualified from the Hall of Fame, but record books too.

So, you're saying that EVERYONE that has admitted to using Greenies should be eliminated from the Hall of Fame? Do you have an idea of how many players that would be and the NAMES on that list. You're talking about gutting the HOF.

If you use the same standard that most sportswriters are using that would mean that NO player from the early 50s until the late 80s would eligible for the HOF, and if they have already been admitted they should be expelled. Is that really what you're saying?

I'm not sure when the HGH rule came into use, but whoever illegally took steriods should be disqualified from the Hall of Fame. Yes, that's what I'm saying. Or you could just put an asterisk by all the players who cheated their way in.

But the question I raised was GREENIES (amphetamines) use. The impression you gave me was that ALL of the Greenies user should be kicked out of the Hall. That would include Brooks and Frank Robinson, Jim Palmer, Eddie Murray, Hank Aaron, Bob Gibson, Mickey Mantle, and a large group of other players.